| Literature DB >> 28486553 |
Sandra I McCoy1, Carolyn Fahey1, Aarthi Rao2, Ntuli Kapologwe3, Prosper F Njau4, Sergio Bautista-Arredondo5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interventions incorporating constructs from behavioral economics and psychology have the potential to enhance HIV 'treatment as prevention' (TasP) strategies. To test this hypothesis, we evaluated an intervention to improve antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence based on the concepts of social norms and priming.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28486553 PMCID: PMC5423659 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177394
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Insights relevant to intervention development derived from the formative research phase, using tools from marketing research and patient-centered design.
| Key Insights for Intervention Development |
|---|
| • People living with HIV infection will travel long distances to visit a clinic far from their community to avoid recognition. |
| • The impact of living with HIV and taking ART on patients' social goals are inadequately addressed by providers (e.g., having children, getting married). |
| • Patients lack frequent touch points with the clinic and reminders to follow health recommendations. |
| • Patients value staff relationships and will travel out of their way to visit a clinic that has trustworthy and/or highly competent staff. |
Patient satisfaction at baseline and after the six-month intervention period (endline), Shinyanga, Tanzania, 2015–2016.
| Characteristic | Adult Patients at Baseline (n = 189) | Adult Patients at Endline (n = 216) | χ2 | p-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | n (%) | |||||
| Less than satisfied | 7 (3.7) | 5 (2.3) | 14.2 | <0.01 | ||
| Satisfied | 116 (61.7) | 96 (44.4) | ||||
| Very satisfied | 65 (34.6) | 115 (53.2) | ||||
| Disagree/Strongly disagree | 35 (18.5) | 29 (13.5) | 1.9 | 0.17 | ||
| Agree/Strongly agree | 154 (81.5) | 186 (86.5) | ||||
| Disagree/Strongly disagree | 75 (39.7) | 63 (29.2) | 5 | 0.03 | ||
| Agree/Strongly agree | 114 (60.3) | 153 (70.8) | ||||
| Not supportive | 9 (4.8) | 0 (0) | 10.7 | <0.01 | ||
| Supportive | 99 (52.4) | 123 (56.9) | ||||
| Very supportive | 81 (42.9) | 93 (43.1) | ||||
| Not supportive | 95 (50.3) | 73 (33.8) | 12.8 | <0.01 | ||
| Supportive | 81 (42.9) | 114 (52.8) | ||||
| Very supportive | 13 (6.9) | 29 (13.4) | ||||
| Yes | 72 (38.1) | 53 (24.5) | 8.7 | <0.01 | ||
| No | 117 (61.9) | 163 (75.5) | ||||
| Yes | 95 (50.3) | 134 (62.0) | 5.7 | 0.02 | ||
| No | 94 (49.7) | 82 (38.0) | ||||
| Understood some/none | 4 (4.2) | 5 (3.8) | 0.03 | 0.86 | ||
| Understood all | 91 (95.8) | 128 (96.2) | ||||
| Definitely | 175 (92.6) | 200 (92.6) | 0 | 1 | ||
| Not sure/Probably not | 14 (7.4) | 16 (7.4) | ||||
| Definitely | 180 (95.2) | 210 (97.2) | 1.1 | 0.29 | ||
| Not sure | 9 (4.8) | 6 (2.8) | ||||
| Most | 60 (31.7) | 116 (53.7) | 25.8 | <0.01 | ||
| Some | 36 (19.1) | 36 (16.7) | ||||
| Few | 18 (9.5) | 22 (10.2) | ||||
| Not sure | 75 (39.7) | 42 (19.4) | ||||
Fig 1Study flowchart.
Characteristics of adult HIV primary care clinic patients, stratified by intervention exposure at baseline, Tanzania, 2015–2016.
| Characteristic | Intervention | Comparison | Test statistic | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N = 320 | N = 118 | ||||
| 18–29 | 0.19 | 0.16 | 0.27 | 0.84 | |
| 30–39 | 0.32 | 0.35 | |||
| 40–49 | 0.28 | 0.27 | |||
| ≥50 | 0.21 | 0.22 | |||
| Female | 0.62 | 0.55 | 2.93 | 0.09 | |
| Male | 0.38 | 0.45 | |||
| ≤90 days | 0.13 | 0.10 | 2.41 | 0.07 | |
| 3–12 months | 0.19 | 0.14 | |||
| 1–3 years | 0.28 | 0.39 | |||
| >3 years | 0.40 | 0.37 | |||
| Yes | 0.13 | 0.10 | 0.98 | 0.32 | |
| No | 0.87 | 0.90 | |||
| 0.74 | 0.73 | 0.09 | 0.93 | ||
| 3TC(150mg)/AZT(300mg)/NVP(200mg) | 0.11 | 0.08 | 0.83 | 0.47 | |
| AZT(300mg)/3TC(150mg)/EFV(600mg) | 0.12 | 0.12 | |||
| TDF(300)/FTC(200)/EFV(600mg) | 0.09 | 0.13 | |||
| TDF(300)/3TC(300)/EFV(600mg) | 0.68 | 0.67 | |||
| Clinic A | 0.38 | 0.45 | 12.29 | 0.001 | |
| Clinic B | 0.62 | 0.55 | |||
a. Weighted statistics to account for sampling strategy. Missing data for weighted patient sample: 2% age, 2% sex, 3% time on ART, 1% baseline appointment attendance, and 3% regimen.
b. Started ART ≤90 days before baseline.
c. Attendance at the last two scheduled appointments (+/- 4 days) prior to the baseline visit.
d. Regimen recorded at the baseline visit.
e. Survey design-corrected Pearson’s Chi-square test for categorical variables and t-test for continuous variables.
Crude and adjusted associations between intervention exposure and retention in HIV care and adherence to antiretroviral therapy after 6 months, Tanzania, 2015–2016.
| Mean (95% CI) at 6 months | Estimated Associations | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention (N = 320) | Comparison (N = 118) | Unadjusted | Site-Adjusted | |||
| OR | (95% CI) | ORa | (95% CI) | |||
| 0.87 (0.85, 0.90) | 0.79 (0.73, 0.86) | 1.83 | (1.16, 2.91) | 1.73 | (1.08, 2.78) | |
| 0.70 (0.65, 0.74) | 0.59 (0.50, 0.67) | 1.62 | (1.08, 2.41) | 1.51 | (0.96, 2.37) | |
| Mean Diff | Mean Diffa (95% CI) | |||||
| 0.90 (0.87, 0.92) | 0.89 (0.86, 0.92) | 0.01 | (-0.03, 0.05) | 0 | (-0.04, 0.04) | |
| 0.73 (0.70, 0.75) | 0.66 (0.61, 0.71) | 0.06 | (0.01, 0.12) | 0.04 | (-0.01, 0.09) | |
CI: confidence interval, OR = Odds ratio
*p≤0.05
**p≤0.01
a. Weighted analyses to account for sampling strategy.
b. Whether the patient was in care at 6 months, defined as a visit between 150 and 210 days (6 months +/- 30 days). Excluding <1% of weighted sample who transferred before 6 months.
c. Medication possession ratio, the proportion of time an individual is in possession of ≥1 ART dose. Excluding 21% of weighted sample who were missing dispensing data for at least one recorded visit.
d. The proportion of scheduled appointments attended (+/- 4 days) during the 6-month intervention period. Excluding <1% of weighted sample who were missing all scheduled visit records.
e. Based on logistic regression by treatment.
f. Based on linear regression by treatment.
g. Adjusted for clinic site.